NIH Budget Cuts

[Anonymous]

Where does this leave our nations largest biomedical industry? Eliminating an entire center will leave these employees where?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/nih-would-see-huge-budget-cut-under-presidents-proposal/2017/03/15/8b6345cc-099e-11e7-93dc-00f9bdd74ed1_story.html?utm_term=.17733a4422cd#comments

[Anonymous]

I'm sitting at NIH having trouble concentrating today.

[Anonymous]

This is just Trump's attempt at making a statement. No way that Congress will cut all of these programs, many of which provide pork for heavily GOP districts. Cutting subsidies for rural airports? Good luck!

[Anonymous]

Well, that goes along with cutting everyone's health care benefits. Why fund research if you're not providing healthcare?
Perhaps the rich politicians will just form their own lab.

People realize that whenever these politicians have any kind of health issue they can go right to Walter Reed for high level immediate health care, right?
Trump had his first visit right near inauguration time. Their lives aren't like yours and mine.

[Anonymous]

Listening to NPR - saying that a good number of these cuts will not be approved by Congress, since some are completely ridiculous. Fogarty at NIH might be one of those preserved, since it manages foreign post-docs, and without those poorly paid slaves (oops, meant to say "respected workforce"), biomedical research at NIH will grind to a halt

[Anonymous]

Trump's throwing red meat to his dumb base. One can only hope saner heads prevail.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Trump's throwing red meat to his dumb base. One can only hope saner heads prevail.

The EPA cuts are red meat. These cuts are about trying to keep his base sick(er) and (more) ignorant.

[Anonymous]

NIH does crucial work but there's a lot of fat. I could cut the budget 10% today, 10% if I worked a while on it.

[Anonymous]

Every organization or company public or private has that type of fat.

They all use that fat to deal with unexpected issues or to jump on amazing opportunities.

You could cut it but it will cost you in the future.

"NIH does crucial work but there's a lot of fat. I could cut the budget 10% today, 10% if I worked a while on it."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NIH does crucial work but there's a lot of fat. I could cut the budget 10% today, 10% if I worked a while on it.

Please tell us exactly what you would cut. Inquiring minds would like to know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NIH does crucial work but there's a lot of fat. I could cut the budget 10% today, 10% if I worked a while on it.

Any large organization, public or private, wastes money, I completely agree. However the "fat" is spread here and there across the organizations, and it's very hard to cut costs while still retaining productivity and morale, even though we should and could, given enough willpower. The easy fixes, getting rid of whole agencies or sub-departments, are NEVER the right solution.

[Anonymous]

Over ten years at NIH and I don't see any fat. Funding was flat for a long time, raises were nonexistent. These are highly specialized scientists dedicating their lives to finding cures for some of the most devastating diseases. Not to mention responding to crises such as Zika, Ebola, and others.
I heard that Trump said he was going to "eliminate all diseases". How is that consistent with a nearly 20% cut at NIH, which includes not just salaries and programs at NIH, but grant funding for scientists around the country?

[Anonymous]

I think when he said eliminating diseases, he was talking about E.D. and arteriosclerosis--diseases that rich men get and so the private drug companies have an incentive to find a pharmacological treatment. Not, like, Ebola, or rare cancers that kills children. Those folks can just tough it out, apparently.

you people at NIH are doing God's work here on earth...I'm really sorry our country elected an idiot who doesn't respect science.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Over ten years at NIH and I don't see any fat. Funding was flat for a long time, raises were nonexistent. These are highly specialized scientists dedicating their lives to finding cures for some of the most devastating diseases. Not to mention responding to crises such as Zika, Ebola, and others.
I heard that Trump said he was going to "eliminate all diseases". How is that consistent with a nearly 20% cut at NIH, which includes not just salaries and programs at NIH, but grant funding for scientists around the country?

Trump could eliminate disease if all the olds and poors die out due to lack of medical treatments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NIH does crucial work but there's a lot of fat. I could cut the budget 10% today, 10% if I worked a while on it.

Please tell us exactly what you would cut. Inquiring minds would like to know.

Not PP, but: every IC has an IT shop, and there is also the central IT, and collectively they are an inefficient, overblown, uncoordinated monstrosity. Both IT contractors and Feds are paid on par or better than scientists and medical staff.